DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
PRELIMINARYAMENDMENT
Examiner acknowledges the preliminary amendment filed 10/07/2024, which cancels claims 4-5 and 7-8.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “unique identifier” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claims
Claims 1-3, 6 and 9-24 are pending.
Claims 4-5 and 7-8 are cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claims 14, 20 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “impenneable”. It appears a typographical error was made and should read “impermeable”. For examination, examiner will treat the claim as correctly spelling impermeable. (see rejection of claim 14 below including correct spelling)
Regarding claims 20 and 21, the claims recite “to generate a steady state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range.” The term “with” should be changed to “within”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 9-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “an output signal”. However an output signal is not structure of a component of the arrangement. Furthermore, the electronic control unit changes the output signal which recites an operation on the output signal but there is no recited structure of where the output signal comes from. Therefore, the claim has been rendered indefinite. The instant specification describes an output indicator (110) and the electronic control unit (100) outputting an output signal. It is unclear which structure the ”output signal” belongs to in regards to the examination of the claim.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “a seal between the first and second body flange annular sealing surfaces results in a gap between the first and second body flanges”. However it is unclear if the seal is a positive recited element being introduced or if it is a description of the environment in which the arrangement is used. Therefore, the claim has been rendered indefinite. The claim should be amended to recite the seal as an element or a clause should be introduced such as “wherein, in use” so that the limitation reads as a statement of the intended environment.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the first outer surface" and “the second outer surface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as first and second outer surfaces are not introduced until claim 2. Currently, claim 10 depends from claim 1 which does not introduce first and second outer surfaces.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites wherein when, in use, the membrane sheet is wrapped around the joint, a longitudinal seam is formed, the membrane being rolled or folded onto itself to form a substantially gas impermeable seal. However it is unclear how the longitudinal seam is formed and how the gas impermeable seal is formed. Therefore, the claim has been rendered indefinite. The instant specification describes the membrane sheet being folded onto itself or rolled tightly together to form the longitudinal seam. It describes the membrane being a gas impermeable membrane. Examiner suggest rewriting/amending the claim to be consistent with what is described in the specification and also to clarify how the longitudinal seam is formed and the membrane being a gas impermeable membrane.
Regarding claim 12 and 14, the claims recite the phrase “substantially gas impermeable seal” and “substantially impenneable”. However it is unclear if the membrane of claim 12 and the gas enclosure of claim 14 are actually gas impermeable or not. There, the claim has been rendered indefinite.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites the limitation "leak detection arrangement". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites “a unique identifier is provided for the pressure boundary joint and/or the leak detection arrangement”. However it is unclear how or where the unique identifier is being provided from. Is the unique identifier attached to the joint or arrangement physically? Is the unique identifier assigned by the electronic control unit digitally? The instant specification describes using a unique identifier but does not describe or show the use of unique identifiers in the specification or drawings of the arrangement or method steps. There, the claim has been rendered indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6, 9, 11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”).
Regarding claim 1, Thiel discloses a leakage detection arrangement (Abstract, Fig 1-3) for a pressure boundary joint of a pressure system (pipe ends 1-2 of the pressure system include ring flanges-3 and 4), the pressure boundary joint having at least a first outer diameter on a first body (flange-3) and a second outer diameter on a second body (flange-4), the leakage detection arrangement including:
a membrane sheet (sealing sleave-8) for wrapping around the joint;
a first adjustable band (tension bands-9) for tightening around the membrane sheet when, in use, the membrane sheet is wrapped around the joint, forming a first circumferential sealing edge under the band between the membrane and the first outer diameter (See Fig 1);
a second adjustable band (tension bands-9) for tightening around the membrane sheet when, in use, the membrane sheet is wrapped around the joint, forming a second circumferential sealing edge under the band between the membrane and the second outer diameter (See Fig 1);
the membrane and the first and second adjustable bands together forming, in use, a gas enclosure around the joint (sealing caps-10 include flexible sealing rings-11 to form gas enclosure around joint);
a gas flow arrangement (vacuum line-12, separator-13, filter -14 and vacuum pump-15 together form the gas flow arrangement) for providing, in use, a flow of gas into or out of the gas enclosure (Paragraph 0018);
a gas flow measuring arrangement (vacuum measuring device-16) for providing a signal indicative of gas flow rate (Paragraph 0018);
an output signal (device-16 emits an electrical signal and evaluation circuit-17 outputs a signal, Paragraph 0018); and
an electronic control unit (evaluation circuit-17) for monitoring the signal indicative of gas flow rate, the electronic control unit changing the output signal when the signal indicative of gas flow rate varies by more than a predetermined amount (Paragraph 0019-0021). (See also paragraphs 0013-0017)
Regarding claim 2, Thiel disclose the first outer diameter is on a first cylindrical outer surface on the first body (flange-3); and the second outer diameter is on a second cylindrical outer surface on the second body (flange-4). (See Fig 1)
Regarding claim 3, Thiel discloses the first outer diameter is on a first body flange on the first body (flange-3), the second outer diameter is on a second body flange on the second body (flange-4), and wherein each of the first and second body flanges includes a respective annular sealing surface (See Figs 1 and 3), a seal between the first and second body flange annular sealing surfaces results in a gap (flange gap-5) between the first and second body flanges (See Paragraphs 0012-0013).
Regarding claim 6, Thiel discloses the pressure boundary joint is a flanged joint including a first bolt flange on the first body and a second bolt flange on the second body, the first bolt flange being bolted to the second bolt flange by multiple bolts; or a threaded joint including a male threaded portion on the first body and a female threaded portion on the second body, the male threaded portion being engaged with the female threaded portion, in use; or a flanged joint including a first clamp flange on the first body and a second clamp flange on the second body, the first clamp flange being clamped to the second clamp flange by a flange connecting clamp (screw connections-7 with sealing caps-10 and sealing rings-11 over them). (See Paragraphs 0013-0017)
Regarding claim 9, Thiel discloses the gas enclosure completely envelopes the pressure boundary joint (sealing caps-10 include flexible sealing rings-11 to form gas enclosure around joint). (See Paragraphs 0013-0017)
Regarding claim 11, Thiel disclose the first body is a pipe, tube, pressure vessel or instrument (pipe end-1); and/or wherein the second body is a pipe, tube, pressure vessel or instrument (pipe end-2).
Regarding claim 13, Thiel discloses the membrane sheet (sealing sleave-8) is a gas impermeable membrane. (Paragraph 0014).
Regarding claim 14, Thiel discloses the gas enclosure is, in use, substantially impermeable. (Paragraph 0014-0019)
Regarding claim 15, Thiel discloses the gas flow arrangement is selected from: a vacuum pump; a positive pressure pump; a pressurised gas cylinder and a flow control valve; a source of pressurised gas at a regulated pressure; and a source of pressurised gas and a flow control valve. (vacuum line-12, separator-13, filter-14 and vacuum pump-15 together form the vacuum pump arrangement)
Regarding claim 16, Thiel discloses the gas flow measuring arrangement (vacuum measuring device-16) includes at least one sensor selected from: a pump electrical current sensor; a pump speed sensor; a gas flow rate sensor; and a pressure sensor. (Paragraph 0021 discloses using a turbine driven by suction flow of the vacuum pump which teaches a gas flow rate sensor and a speed sensor design.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”) in view of Miller et al US4879896 (hereinafter “Miller”).
Regarding claim 10, Thiel discloses the first outer surface on the first body is on a periphery of a flange on the first body (flange-3 is included on pipe end-1).
However, Thiel fails to disclose the second outer surface on the second body is on an outer diameter of a pipe or tube of the second body, or on a cylindrical portion on the second body. Miller discloses the second outer surface on the second body is on an outer diameter of a pipe or tube of the second body, or on a cylindrical portion on the second body (enclosure-70 includes flexible wrap-74 adapted to be wrapped around two joined pipe sections). (See Figs 1-7 and Col 7 line 8-Col 8 line 19)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Miller into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for a more secure connection of the device which can decrease measurement errors.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”) in view of Rice US7673654.
Regarding claim 12, Thiel discloses the arrangement according to claim 1.
However, Thiel fails to disclose the membrane sheet is wrapped around the joint, a longitudinal seam is formed, the membrane being rolled or folded onto itself to form a substantially gas impermeable seal. Rice discloses the membrane sheet (containment component-36) is wrapped around the joint (pipe-14), a longitudinal seam (end-100 of the component-36 overlaps the other end of the component-36 and hose clamp-68 or other component used to secure the component to form gas impermeable seal) is formed, the membrane being rolled or folded onto itself to form a substantially gas impermeable seal. (See Figs 9-10A, Col 10 lines 1-32)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Rice into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for decreasing false readings which can decrease measurement errors.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”) in view of Schwartz US7714710.
Regarding claim 17, Thiel discloses the arrangement according to claim 1.
However, Thiel fails to disclose a unique identifier is provided for the pressure boundary joint and/or the leak detection arrangement. Schwartz discloses a unique identifier is provided for the pressure boundary joint and/or the leak detection arrangement. (See Figs 2-3 and Col 4 line 4 -38, Col 5 line 60-Col 6 line 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Schwartz into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow equipment to be quickly located and utilized more efficiently to determine the exact location of the leak.
Claims 18-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”) in view of Boyer US5269171.
Regarding claim 18, Thiel discloses a method (Device shown in figures 1-3 implement the method) of detecting leakage from a pressure boundary joint of a pressure system (pipe ends 1-2 of the pressure system include ring flanges-3 and 4), the pressure boundary joint having at least a first outer diameter on a first body (flange-3) and a second outer diameter on a second body (flange-4), the method including:
wrapping a sheet of membrane (sealing sleeve-8) around the joint;
tightening a first adjustable band (tension bands-9) around the membrane sheet, forming a first circumferential sealing edge under the band between the membrane and the first outer diameter (See fig 1);
tightening a second adjustable band (tension bands-9) around the membrane sheet, forming a second circumferential sealing edge under the band between the membrane and the second outer diameter (See fig 1), such that the membrane and the first and second adjustable bands together form a gas enclosure around the joint (sealing caps-10 include flexible sealing rings-11 to form gas enclosure around joint);
generating a pressure differential between the gas enclosure and atmosphere using a gas flow arrangement (vacuum line-12, separator-13 , filter -14 and vacuum pump-15 together form the gas flow arrangement);
measuring at least one parameter indicative of gas flow rate using a gas flow measuring arrangement (vacuum measuring device-16) and using said parameter to generate a respective gas flow rate indicative signal (paragraph 0018);
monitoring the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for a first period to obtain a state first gas flow rate, then monitoring the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for a second period to obtain a state second gas flow rate;
comparing the second gas flow rate with the first gas flow rate to obtain a change in gas flow rate (Paragraphs 0017-0023);
if the change in gas flow rate is greater than a predetermined amount, providing an output indicating that the pressure boundary joint has a leak (evaluation circuit-17 outputs an alarm) (See Paragraphs 0019-0021). (See also paragraphs 0013-0017)
However, Thiel fails to disclose monitoring the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for a first period to obtain a steady state first gas flow rate, monitoring the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for a second period to obtain a steady state second gas flow rate. Boyer discloses monitoring the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for a first period to obtain a steady state first gas flow rate, monitoring the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for a second period to obtain a steady state second gas flow rate and comparing the second gas flow rate with the first gas flow rate to obtain a change in gas flow rate (Col 2 line 29-52, Col 6 line 55-64)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Boyer into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using stable, unchanging flow and pressure baselines to find leaks by spotting residual errors between expected models and actual sensor readings.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Thiel in view of Boyer disclose the method according to claim 18.
Furthermore, Thiel discloses the gas flow arrangement includes a vacuum pump or a positive pressure pump (vacuum line-12, separator-13, filter -14 and vacuum pump-15 together form the vacuum pump arrangement), and the gas flow measuring arrangement (vacuum measuring device-16) includes at least one sensor selected from: a pump electrical current sensor; a pump speed sensor; a gas flow rate sensor; and a gas enclosure pressure sensor; (Paragraph 0021 discloses using a turbine driven by suction flow of the vacuum pump which teaches a gas flow rate sensor and a speed sensor design.) and wherein the step of measuring at least one parameter indicative of gas flow rate includes measuring an output from said at least one sensor (Evaluation circuit-17). (See Paragraphs 0019-0021).
Regarding clam 20, Thiel discloses the gas flow arrangement an adjustable flow valve (valve-18), and the gas flow measuring arrangement includes at least one sensor selected from: a gas flow rate sensor; and a gas enclosure pressure sensor (Paragraph 0021 discloses using a turbine driven by suction flow of the vacuum pump which teaches a gas flow rate sensor and a speed sensor design.), the step of generating a pressure differential between the gas enclosure and atmosphere including adjusting the adjustable flow valve to generate a state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range. (Paragraph 0020-0023)
However, Thiel fails to disclose including a pressurised gas cylinder and to generate a steady state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range. Boyer discloses a pressurised gas cylinder (tank-14) and to generate a steady state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range. (Col 2 line 29-52, Col 6 line 55-64)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Boyer into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using stable, unchanging flow and pressure baselines to find leaks by spotting residual errors between expected models and actual sensor readings.
Regarding claim 21, Thiel discloses the gas flow arrangement includes and a pressure regulator (valve-18), and the gas flow measuring arrangement includes at least one sensor selected from: a gas flow rate sensor; and a gas enclosure pressure sensor, (Paragraph 0021 discloses using a turbine driven by suction flow of the vacuum pump which teaches a gas flow rate sensor and a speed sensor design.), the step of generating a pressure differential between the gas enclosure and atmosphere including adjusting the pressure regulator to generate a state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range. (Paragraph 0020-0023)
However, Thiel fails to disclose a source of pressurised gas and to generate a steady state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range. Boyer discloses a source of pressurised gas (tank-14) and to generate a steady state first gas flow rate with a predetermined range. (Col 2 line 29-52, Col 6 line 55-64)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Boyer into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using stable, unchanging flow and pressure baselines to find leaks by spotting residual errors between expected models and actual sensor readings.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Thiel in view of Boyer disclose the method according to claim 18.
Furthermore, Thiel discloses when the output is provided to indicate that the pressure boundary joint has a leak, the output is latched or a flag is set to enable the presence of a possible leak at the joint to be seen or received after it has been detected. (Paragraph 0020-0023)
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”) in view of Boyer US5269171 in further view of Armstrong et al US4776206 (hereinafter “Armstrong”).
Regarding claim 22, Thiel discloses the monitoring of the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for the second period is performed after the pressure system is pressurised, the second gas flow rate being an operating gas flow rate. (Paragraph 0018-0023)
However, the combination of Thiel and Boyer fails to disclose the monitoring of the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for the first period is performed before the pressure system is pressurised, the first gas flow rate being a baseline gas flow rate. Armstrong discloses the monitoring of the at least one gas flow rate indicative signal for the first period is performed before the pressure system is pressurised, the first gas flow rate being a baseline gas flow rate. (Col 1 line 50-61, Col 2 line 60-Col 3 line 11, Col 3 line 46- Col 4 line 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Armstrong into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for establishing a clean reference point by isolating existing background noise and environmental pressure before any testing is introduced.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Radolid Thiel GmbH DE3509775 (hereinafter “Thiel”) in view of Boyer US5269171 in further view of Schwartz US7714710.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Thiel and Boyer discloses the method according to claim 18.
However, Thiel fails to disclose the method includes assigning a unique identifier to the pressure boundary joint. Schwartz discloses the method includes assigning a unique identifier to the pressure boundary joint. (See Figs 2-3 and Col 4 line 4 -38, Col 5 line 60-Col 6 line 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Schwartz into Thiel for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow equipment to be quickly located and utilized more efficiently to determine the exact location of the leak.
Conclusion
The prior art as cited on the PTO-892 is made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Haritou et al US20220082190 discloses a bolted flange joint sealing and monitoring apparatus with the bolting flange joint having two flanges abutting one another at an interface and the abutting flanges providing an inner surface and an outer surface. A layer of sealant applied to the interface and an area of the abutting flanges. An inner and outer surface of sheet material providing an air space. A sealant forming an air tight space. A vacuum source in communication with the air tight space and a vacuum monitor monitoring the status of a vacuum in the air tight space.
Sanchez US20170082517 discloses a leak identification system includes a boundary containment system and a leak indicator system that enables quick identification of leaks within various systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIGEL H PLUMB whose telephone number is (571)272-8886. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (USA or CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NIGEL H PLUMB/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/Eric S. McCall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights